Rules Clarification List

[trees]

ORIGINAL: Frederyck

ORIGINAL: Froonp

As soon as Japan is at war with the NEI, the PART leaves German control and goes under Japanese control.

Correct. I forgot about the change in control. But the scenario is still correct - if Japan tries to invade the partisan-filled Batavia, they would have to fight both the notional and the partisan, even though the partisan is controlled by the axis.

And as Steve pointed out, the event that a partisan co-operates with units it is at war with does pop-up at times in India.

Once Japan controlled the NEI partisans upon DoW, Japan could not enter a hex with an NEI partisan due to cooperation rules. Japan could use a land move to move the Partisan to another hex, at which point the hex would again be controlled by the Allies, and Japan would have to fight the notional there.

[Jeff Gilbert]

Twitch, twitch ...

I am going to have to go backand re-read RAW and this entire thread as I am now most confused with the partisan control in this particular example.

Partisans ... "curiouser and curiouser" might be the correct quote. [:)]

[paulderynck]

Since I have shown you that Eastern Poland is a territory (per the RaW). And Poland not Eastern Poland is where Polish partisans are placed.

You are laboring under a serious misconception if you think you have shown anyone this. Quotes from 19.5.1:
- "rights to occupy eastern Poland"
- "by moving a land unit into any hex of eastern Poland"
- "the part of Poland to the east of the partition line becomes conquered by the Soviets"

Yes there is a statement in RAW about geographical entities but I know of no territories in the game that when entered cause:
- internment of their defense forces
- the teleportation of units on the opposite side to other locations
- a different definition of how they are conquered
The creation of East Poland as a territory ought to deserve at least a scant, passing mention in the rules, wouldn't you think?

The problem is RAW has a bunch of specific rules covering East Poland but simply leaves its status undefined when it comes to partisans, and the rules do not prohibit their placement in 11 hexes there (8 if Rumania is Axis-aligned).

I'd be quite happy to learn that Patrice has this on his list for clarification by Harry, as I think that is the only way to resolve the issue.

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: composer99

Outside of the Pripet Marshes, where would a partisan placed in Eastern Poland actually be safe? And aside from letting one less Russian army stand on the front line, how would it do any good as a speed bump? By 1941 most partisans are still 0-1 factor. Sure, there are plenty of forests and swamps in Eastern Poland, but a single partisan unit will stand no chance against any German army force that wants to take care of them - and since the slow-moving German forces will end their impulse in that area, I don't see how a partisan in Eastern Poland will actually slow the German advance. Either it goes in the clear and dies from the overrun, or it goes in the Carpathians and/or Pripets and either gets screened or gets blown away by slow-moving Germans, or it goes in the forests and gets blown away by slow-moving Germans.

Thank you for recognizing that the partisans can - at present - go there.

The CW would and should place them where they will do the most good to the Allied cause. In such a case, they sit out of the way of the Russians until needed and so they are the safest anti-axis partisans in the world, pre-Barb. The following are possibilites:
- there could be more than one of them
- in forest (and swamp in winter) even a zero, is a potential hex blocker that cannot be overrun
- many have enough movement points to be able to move to somewhere more useful while the Russians withdraw, for example Lvov & Vilna, in which case if it held up the Germans and had zero combat factors, it would even be sweeter!

Who cares if they get blown away as long as they slow down some German units? Aren't free units for this purpose better than 2 BP units? Sure they don't have ZOCs, but in combination with other speed bump garrisons, the overall cost to delay the German advance is lower.

And, if they are to be blown away in East Poland anyway, how much quicker would they uselessly have their existence terminated in western Poland?

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck
I'd be quite happy to learn that Patrice has this on his list for clarification by Harry, as I think that is the only way to resolve the issue.

It is there as Q222

****************************************
After the USSR conquers Eastern Poland, but before Germany and the USSR is at war, is Eastern Poland a part of the Polish Home Country?
If so, can a PART designated for Poland appear in Eastern Poland?
If a PART can't appear in Eastern Poland, can it move there after it has appeared and thereby be out of reach for the German forces?
****************************************

[Mziln]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Since I have shown you that Eastern Poland is a territory (per the RaW). And Poland not Eastern Poland is where Polish partisans are placed.

You are laboring under a serious misconception if you think you have shown anyone this. Quotes from 19.5.1:
- "rights to occupy eastern Poland"
- "by moving a land unit into any hex of eastern Poland"
- "the part of Poland to the east of the partition line becomes conquered by the Soviets"

Yes there is a statement in RAW about geographical entities but I know of no territories in the game that when entered cause:
- internment of their defense forces
- the teleportation of units on the opposite side to other locations
- a different definition of how they are conquered
The creation of East Poland as a territory ought to deserve at least a scant, passing mention in the rules, wouldn't you think?

The problem is RAW has a bunch of specific rules covering East Poland but simply leaves its status undefined when it comes to partisans, and the rules do not prohibit their placement in 11 hexes there (8 if Rumania is Axis-aligned).

I'd be quite happy to learn that Patrice has this on his list for clarification by Harry, as I think that is the only way to resolve the issue.

I am sorry that you are confused and can’t grasp the concept of special rules. But it doesn’t alter the facts.

No one new what Eastern Poland was Frederyck #165, you #173, and Patrice #174.

Until I found Eastern Poland is a territory (per the RaW):

13.7.1 Conquest

"You can only conquer a home country or territory".

2.5 Control

Entities

There are 2 geographical entities in the game ~ home countries and territories. Home countries have capital cities, territories do not.

Since Eastern Poland has no capital it cannot be a home country it is therefore a territory.


13.1 Partisans (option 46)

Getting partisans

At the start of this step, roll a die and locate the result on the partisan table. This will specify 8 countries eligible for partisan activity in the turn.

Each of those countries named on the chart on a green background is eligible if it has been conquered or if any of its hexes contains an enemy unit. Note: “France” means Occupied France after a Vichy government has been installed (see 17.1).

Eastern Poland is not on the chart (or listed in the partisan list in the computer game) and therefore partisans cannot be placed there.

The chart doesn't say "Poland and its territories" it just says Poland. Just because the territory of Eastern Poland has Poland in the name doesn’t allow you to put partisans in it.

Aden is a territory of the CW it is not a home country and is not in the table therefore partisans cannot be placed in it. This is exactly like Eastern Poland.


13.1 Partisans (option 46)

Partisans may move anywhere within their home country. They can never leave their home country.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

MWIF is mantaining 4 types of "Governed Areas" to accommodate the various rules concerning groups of hexes that are referred to in RAW.

1 - Governed area: which is the simplest form. The other three type are specialized types of governed areas. I chose this phrase and I am still not happy about it - but it was the best I could come up with.
2 - Sub-countries: another awkward choice of words (this time from CWIF), but I have not been able to think of anything better.
3 - Minor countries: as per the use of this word in RAW.
4 - Major powers: as per the use of this word in RAW.

4 - There are 9 major powers, with Vichy considered a major power as far as MWIF is concerned - to handle some of the special Vichy rules that set it apart from other minor countries (e.g., that it can be hostile to other major powers).

3 - Minor countries have a capital to call their own.

2 - Sub-countries cover a multiple of sins. The SS and Siberian units are treated as 'sub-countries' because they use a different coloring sheme for the units. Both Nationalist and Communist China are sub-countries, while China itself is a major power. The Ukraine, Sudetenland, Polish corridor, Finnish borderlands, Bessarabia, Spanish Nationalists, Spanish Republic, and South Dobruja are other examples of sub-countries. Some of these are included in this category because of how their units are displayed on the screen (colors) and others because borders are drawn on the map for them (Sudetenland). Most of them are in this grouping because there are special rules in RAW to deal with the collection of hexes that make up a section of a larger political entity (major power or minor country usually).

Easterm Poland is a sub-country of Poland as far as MWIF is concerned. It requires a border to be drawn differentiating it from the rest of Poland. And similar to Transylvania, South Dobruja, Finnish Borderlands, and Bessarabia, ownership of the area changes due to political decisions by the players, rather than through the normal conquest rules.

1 - There are 99 Governed areas in MWIF and they include all the territories. I am loathe to rename the variable to simply Territories, becasue internally the program treats all the other 3 types as special cases of Governed Areas and I do not want to get confused thinking of minor countries as a special type of 'territory'.

[Frederyck]

ORIGINAL: Mziln

No one new what Eastern Poland was Frederyck #165, you #173, and Patrice #174.

Until I found Eastern Poland is a territory (per the RaW):[/b]

I hope you are only implying that Eastern Poland is a Territory *after* the USSR claims it. Before this happens there is only a single nation - Poland, with a capital. The construction of Eastern Poland was something invented for the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact.

And I think I agree with you, which is why I posed this very question in post 92, albeit asking the other way round (whether Eastern Poland was part of the Polish home country).

[Shannon V. OKeets]

A new question concerning setup.

In Lebensraum the Nationalist Chinese are suppose to set up 5 miliita units. Now there are only 5 militia units in the Nationalist counter mix so I guess that means all of them. However, 3 of them are from cities that start the scenario controlled by the Japanese. So, do the Nationalist Chinese get to set up the Peking militia, or do they only set up 2 militia units. This also comes up in Global War too.

If the Chinese get all 5 militia units to start, then note that if the militia from Peking is destroyed it cannot be rebuilt until the Chinese regain control of Peking.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

A new question concerning setup.

In Lebensraum the Nationalist Chinese are suppose to set up 5 miliita units. Now there are only 5 militia units in the Nationalist counter mix so I guess that means all of them. However, 3 of them are from cities that start the scenario controlled by the Japanese. So, do the Nationalist Chinese get to set up the Peking militia, or do they only set up 2 militia units. This also comes up in Global War too.

If the Chinese get all 5 militia units to start, then note that if the militia from Peking is destroyed it cannot be rebuilt until the Chinese regain control of Peking.

They setup the militia, even for cities they do not control.
As you said, if those MIL die, they cannot be rebuilt (hence the comment of a contributor on the China strategy thread, to have them defending in a place where you can avoid loosing it).

[iamspamus]

Patrice, you are correct. JA gets their first and then CW gets the leftover. But that's not the issue that he is asking, I think. (I don't have the map in front of me. Say NEI has 4 oil.) I think that his question is as below:

If GE controls the Part, sitting on a 2 oil space, then are those two oil not produced/shipped; thus only allowing the remaining two to go JA and CW gets nothing?

OR

Are those two sent to JA (since the Part is GE controlled) thus the remaining two would be sent to CW?

I'd think the fomer. Correct?

Jason

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

The choice of phrasing about the NEI oil seems to indicate that 2 oil go to Japan and what ever else remains goes to the CW. If partisans are interfernig with the oil shipments, then the CW suffers - Japan still gets its 2 oil points. I guess the Japanese cried 'dibs' first.

This is right.
Japan is served first, CW takes what's left.

ORIGINAL: Mziln

(First a description of what the NEI is)

13.3.2 US entry options

43. CW reinforces the Netherlands East Indies

“The Netherlands East Indies is a minor country consisting of all the 1939 NEI-controlled hexes in the Bay of Bengal, Bismark Sea, East Indian Ocean, South China Sea and Timor Sea. Its capital is Batavia.”

Now lets pour some gasoline on the fire. Here is the scenario:


5.1 Trade agreements

Netherlands

The Netherlands must supply Japan with 2 oil resources a turn. This continues until Japan is at war with either the Netherlands or the Commonwealth, or the US embargoes oil sales to Japan (see 13.3.2, entry option 31).

A neutral Netherlands must supply the CW with all its remaining oil.


Option 31 Oil embargo has not been implemented.



With Germany is controlling the partisans in the NEI.

Would a "red partisan" is in Palembang block only the shipments of oil from the NEI to the CW?



With The CW are controlling the partisans in the NEI.

Would "red partisans" in Palembang, Balikpapan, and Tarakan block only the shipments of oil from the NEI to Japan?

if 2 oil cannot be shipped to Japan will this also block oil shipments to the CW from the NEI?



Does China or Japan control partisans in the NEI if the Netherlands is conquered?

“Partisans in ‘red’ countries are controlled by the nearest major power currently at war with the major power that controls the country. The nearest is the major power whose capital city is closest to the minor’s capital city. If no major powers are at war with the controlling major power, then the nearest major power on the other side runs the partisans.”

[Froonp]

Patrice, you are correct. JA gets their first and then CW gets the leftover. But that's not the issue that he is asking, I think. (I don't have the map in front of me. Say NEI has 4 oil.) I think that his question is as below:

If GE controls the Part, sitting on a 2 oil space, then are those two oil not produced/shipped; thus only allowing the remaining two to go JA and CW gets nothing?

OR

Are those two sent to JA (since the Part is GE controlled) thus the remaining two would be sent to CW?

I'd think the fomer. Correct?

Sorry for misunderstanding.

I think the latter, because trade agreements HAVE to be respected if possible. The latter case allows for both agreements to be respected, the former does not, so the latter must be chosen.

[Froonp]

On the other hand, PART deny the hex owner the benefits of owning the hex, so the NEI per see does not control those 2 OIL anymore.
So the NEI can only decide to ship the 2 others OIL, and the NEI is obliged to ship them to Japan.
The 2 OILS that are in the PART's hex are no longer controlled by the NEI.

[Mziln]

ORIGINAL:  Frederyck

I hope you are only implying that Eastern Poland is a Territory *after* the USSR claims it. Before this happens there is only a single nation - Poland, with a capital. The construction of Eastern Poland was something invented for the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact.

And I think I agree with you, which is why I posed this very question in post 92, albeit asking the other way round (whether Eastern Poland was part of the Polish home country).

Yup. Eastern Poland will only exist when conquered.


I admit I have had time to reflect on my little scenario with the “red partisans” and the NEI and it is a complex one and I apologize.

But here is how I see it.


Germany incompletely conquers the Netherlands when Amsterdam is captured.

Germany controls the “red partisans” until Germany completely conquers the Netherlands or Japan conquers the NEI by capturing Batavia.

Japan would control the “red partisans” when Germany completely conquers the Netherlands and Japan has not captured Batavia.

China would control the “red partisans” when the Axis have captured Batavia.

The CW never controls the “red partisans” unless they DoW on the Netherlands or NEI. They can control the NEI and its units but the “red partisans” are against anyone who controls the NEI.



No the “red partisans” do not block the shipments of oil from the NEI to the CW because the Netherlands are at war. The oil goes to the Netherlands (if the partisans arn't sitting on them and yes Japan gets their 2 oil first). I missed this too the first time around and I apologize for that.


I would let the CW control the Netherlands. Then I could then choose Britain as the Netherlands new home country.


Incomplete conquest

“Conquered minor countries can pick either any home country of their controlling major power or any home country that the minor country itself controls”.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

There are some naval units in the game with identical names. This happens for the Finns and for the Yugoslavians. Since one of the matching units is a Cruiser and the other is a Light Cruiser, can I assume that the Cruiser is not used when the Cruisers in Flames optional rule is in effect? Cruisers in Flames adds all the Light Cruisers.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

There are some naval units in the game with identical names. This happens for the Finns and for the Yugoslavians. Since one of the matching units is a Cruiser and the other is a Light Cruiser, can I assume that the Cruiser is not used when the Cruisers in Flames optional rule is in effect? Cruisers in Flames adds all the Light Cruisers.

Not that I would like to contradict our beloved game developper [:'(], but...

The Dalmacija exist in 2 versions in WiF FE. One belongs to WiF FE (CS24) and is a CL, and the other belongs to SiF (CS19) and is a CA. When SiF is in use, the WiF FE Classic ships are no more in use, so the Dalmacija from CS24 is not in use in MWiF (and is not in the game).
This Dalmacija CL is not part of CLiF, and anyway is not included in the MWiF neither, but anyway, you're right that CL included in MWiF (which are CL from CLiF, not CL fro WiF FE Classic) should not be in the game if the CLiF option is not selected.

The Vainamoinen exist in 4 versions.
- The first, is the LiF (CS25, 1998) version, depicting it as a BB class (1st cycle cost 2 BP).
- The second, is the CLiF (CS36, 2003) version, depicting it as a CL class (1st cycle cost 1 BP).
- The 3rd and 4th are on the latest CS23 (2007), both depicted as a BB class ship. One is WiF FE Classic scaled, the other is SiF Scaled, and is accompanied by its sistership the Ilnamoinen.

I think that only the latest should be kept (at SiF scale). The MWiF datafiles will be updated soon to include the 2007 counters, and I intend (if you agree with me) to have the Vainamoinen & Ilnamoinen appear in these data as the latest CS show them. As a last note, all versions of the Vainamoinen have the same factors, only the build cost are differents.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
There are some naval units in the game with identical names. This happens for the Finns and for the Yugoslavians. Since one of the matching units is a Cruiser and the other is a Light Cruiser, can I assume that the Cruiser is not used when the Cruisers in Flames optional rule is in effect? Cruisers in Flames adds all the Light Cruisers.

Not that I would like to contradict our beloved game developper [:'(], but...

The Dalmacija exist in 2 versions in WiF FE. One belongs to WiF FE (CS24) and is a CL, and the other belongs to SiF (CS19) and is a CA. When SiF is in use, the WiF FE Classic ships are no more in use, so the Dalmacija from CS24 is not in use in MWiF (and is not in the game).
This Dalmacija CL is not part of CLiF, and anyway is not included in the MWiF neither, but anyway, you're right that CL included in MWiF (which are CL from CLiF, not CL fro WiF FE Classic) should not be in the game if the CLiF option is not selected.

The Vainamoinen exist in 4 versions.
- The first, is the LiF (CS25, 1998) version, depicting it as a BB class (1st cycle cost 2 BP).
- The second, is the CLiF (CS36, 2003) version, depicting it as a CL class (1st cycle cost 1 BP).
- The 3rd and 4th are on the latest CS23 (2007), both depicted as a BB class ship. One is WiF FE Classic scaled, the other is SiF Scaled, and is accompanied by its sistership the Ilnamoinen.

I think that only the latest should be kept (at SiF scale). The MWiF datafiles will be updated soon to include the 2007 counters, and I intend (if you agree with me) to have the Vainamoinen & Ilnamoinen appear in these data as the latest CS show them. As a last note, all versions of the Vainamoinen have the same factors, only the build cost are differents.

Yes.

Are there any other naval counters/units with identical names I need to worry about? The program has a built-in assumption that the names of all the naval units are unique.

[paulderynck]

Are there any other naval counters/units with identical names I need to worry about?

There are a number of divisions that have had iterations in several counter sheets, and only one should be in a game of WIFFE, per Patrice's excellent excel counter lists. If memory serves:
The Brit 50th Motorized Inf.
The French 3 DRM Armour
The Italian Trento Motorized Inf.
...there may be others.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Are there any other naval counters/units with identical names I need to worry about?

There are a number of divisions that have had iterations in several counter sheets, and only one should be in a game of WIFFE, per Patrice's excellent excel counter lists. If memory serves:
The Brit 50th Motorized Inf.
The French 3 DRM Armour
The Italian Trento Motorized Inf.
...there may be others.

It is only the HQ and naval units that need unique names. I know the 67 HQs are all unique. The names for land and air units do not need to be unique.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Are there any other naval counters/units with identical names I need to worry about?

There are a number of divisions that have had iterations in several counter sheets, and only one should be in a game of WIFFE, per Patrice's excellent excel counter lists. If memory serves:
The Brit 50th Motorized Inf.
The French 3 DRM Armour
The Italian Trento Motorized Inf.
...there may be others.

With the new CS23, this problem has been solved, as the units who had a duplicate name are changed to other names.